Plaintiff (Law Firm Rate, Attorneys Jeong Jin-jin et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Sejong Tax Office (Law Firm Dongin, Attorneys Kim Jae-in, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

October 12, 2007

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2006Guhap8617 decided Feb. 1, 2007

1. The defendant's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

In the first place, each of the disposition imposing value added tax on the Plaintiff on April 1, 2005 and February 6, 2006 by the Defendant is revoked.

Preliminaryly, the Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax on April 1, 2005 against the Plaintiff each of the imposition of value-added tax stated in the separate sheet No. 2 attached hereto (the date of the disposition was specified on April 1, 2005 and April 22, 2005; however, the imposition of value-added tax on April 22, 2005 is the first disposition for the reduction of value-added tax on April 1, 2004, which was the first disposition for the reduction of value-added tax on April 1, 2005 and appears to be a clerical error in the date of the disposition; the imposition of value-added tax on April 1, 2004, other than the first disposition for the first period, was indicated as the primary claim and the contents of the main claim were both the same, and thus, the conjunctive claim and the contents of the main claim are deemed to be the error in the indication.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is dismissed, respectively (the court of first instance dismissed the above part of the lawsuit, but is excluded from the object of the judgment of this court because the plaintiff did not appeal)

The reasoning for the court's explanation on this case is the same as that for the corresponding column of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it can be accepted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

【Omission of Tax Invoice】

Judges Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Judge)